Talk:Ryan Kavanaugh/Archive 4

HSX/ESX exposition
, I undid these edits pending discussion here on the talk page because they are poorly supported by the source. The source says, ...ESX, in which moviegoers can invest in individual Hollywood studio films, much like Wall Street investors do. It doesn't totally elucidate the "real world" vs. simulated nature of the exchange. Proxima Media said investing would happen through their cryptocurrency, (which isn't exactly "like Wall Street") so the nature of how ESX would have hypothetically worked is a bit unclear. And we shouldn't extrapolate beyond the sources.

For my part, I'm not sure expounding on the difference between HSX and ESX is due, either. HSX is relevant as to RK's inspiration and Spar's experience, but beyond that I don't think it's very relevant.

If consensus decides this exposition is due, we at least need a clearer source on the nature of ESX. Popoki35 (talk) 13:17, 5 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I think the most important addition by Dan Harkless is the clarification that HSX is in fact a game and not an actual stock exchange as the name would lead you to believe. I don't view anything beyond that, including the differences between HSX and ESX, as particularly relevant unless supported by additional citations. Throast (talk &#124; contribs) 16:19, 5 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks, . Yes, that was the reason I made the change.  I was completely distracted from the subject of this article, thanks to the false implication that HSX was a real stock exchange, and one that I couldn't believe I'd never heard of before.  I then went over to the HSX article and found out that it's an online game, so calling ESX a "similar exchange" was completely inaccurate without additional differentiating wording, given that ESX was intended for real-world film financing, rather than just being a simulation.
 * The TheWrap.com article makes it plenty clear that the ESX platform would allow individual investors to invest in and trade specific in-production film properties, in order to finance them. The exact nature of how ESX would work is totally irrelevant, and doesn't need better sources.  The fact that one is a game and one is a film-financing platform is very relevant, especially if the word "similar" is going to be used in such a false manner.  I vote we put back my latest revision of the sentence:
 * After unsuccessfully attempting to acquire the online stock trading game Hollywood Stock Exchange (HSX) in February 2019, Kavanaugh set out to create a similar film properties trading exchange, but using real currency rather than simulated, to do actual film financing.
 * If you really think that's too wordy, "similar film properties trading exchange" could be changed back to "similar exchange", given my other additions to the sentence. --Dan Harkless (talk) 05:20, 6 July 2022 (UTC)


 * My suggestion would be: "...Kavanaugh set out to create a real-life trading exchange, similar to the HSX game, for fans to invest in movies." Regarding the previous suggestion, I'm pretty confident that the source doesn't clarify the "realness" of the currency. Popoki35 (talk) 06:38, 6 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I think your version is more awkward, and incorrectly narrows the customers to "fans". As for whether non-simulated currency was to be used, I think this (from TheWrap.com) is perfectly clear on that:
 * Proxicoin holders will also be partial owners of Entertainment Stock X (ESX), a new platform that the company intends to launch by the end of the year that would work like a stock exchange for financing entertainment projects through Regulation A of the JOBS act.
 * Each film or TV show will undergo an IPO, providing liquidity for each through aftermarket trading. The trading platform already has deals for listings on over 30 feature film projects, the company said, though no specific titles were announced.
 * --Dan Harkless (talk) 07:13, 6 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I used "fans" as a reinterpretation of "moviegoers" from the source. The second source is just a churnalistic makeover of a press release by Proxima Media. That's why I wrote the info deriving from it as "Proxima Media announced..." because we need to be incredibly cautious about what is essentially a primary source for the information. Popoki35 (talk) 08:54, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I would support Popoki35's version but replace "real-life trading exchange" with "film properties trading exchange" and strike the "similar to the HSX game" bit. The term "fans" is supported by this Fox Business source, which we could add. Dan Harkless, plainly calling it a "film properties trading exchange" already implies that it's real-world; expanding on it would lead us into UNDUE-territory imo. Throast (talk &#124; contribs) 10:56, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Even if sources happened to use the word "fans", I think it'd be way overreaching to take away that Proxima was only targeting individual filmgoers (excluding, for instance, businesses that have traditionally stayed away from film financing). I think the more neutral "the public" would be a lot better.  Also, I think it's confusing and distracting if we don't specify that the goal of ESX was financing of in-development projects.  Here's your proposal, Throast, with those two addressed:
 * After unsuccessfully attempting to acquire the online stock trading game Hollywood Stock Exchange (HSX) in February 2019, Kavanaugh set out to create a film properties trading exchange for the public to invest in movie production.
 * Another good thing about that wording is that it mostly removes the prior clear implication, unsupported by the sources, that Kavanaugh's original plan was to convert the HSX game directly into a real-world investment platform.
 * Also, reading down in the article to make sure the proposed text isn't redundant, I think the word "collectively" should be removed from "use funds from small-scale investors to collectively finance film slates", as it has a false implication that ESX would be a game, like HSX, and simply use its proceeds to finance film slates en masse, rather than allowing individuals to directly determine which projects they were investing in. (Arguably "film slates" should be changed for the same reason, but I don't feel strongly about that one.)  --Dan Harkless (talk) 11:47, 6 July 2022 (UTC)


 * We should of course stick to the sources (preferably news reports over Proxima Media press releases). Kavanaugh states in the Fox Business interview that the platform is catered to "consumers who are buying tickets to movies to be investors in the films they love" and made "for investors to literally purchase into their favorite movies". The Fox Business article synthesizes that as meaning "fans". I think using the term is fine and better supported than "the public". Throast (talk &#124; contribs) 12:42, 6 July 2022 (UTC)


 * To me, "consumers", "investors", and "the public" have about the same meaning in this context, whereas "fans" is incorrectly overspecific, but I don't feel as strongly about that aspect as the other stuff. --Dan Harkless (talk) 12:53, 6 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I support Throast's version: ...Kavanaugh set out to create a film properties trading exchange for fans to invest in movies. Popoki35 (talk) 13:18, 6 July 2022 (UTC)